Ixian
Well-known member
Yeah, instead it was only 95 billion dollars leaving the country. What a great "compromise".
Immigration and multiculturalism news
- Thread starter Aldarion
- Start date
Yeah, instead it was only 95 billion dollars leaving the country. What a great "compromise".
King Arts
Well-known member
Yes like 75% of the left are commie authoritorians as opposed to libertarian. But not all authoritorians are leftist. Singapore's leaders are not leftist, neither was China(not CCP but Chiang Kai Shek guys the ones who made Taiwan the Republic of China) also Franco and Spain. They were all authoritarian. But they were not leftist, they were in fact anti communist
Blasterbot
Well-known member
We got the libertarians. they sometimes do something silly like take off their pants in the middle of a debate.
mrttao
Well-known member
Liberterians are not leftist. They are centrists who just want to be left the fuck alone.
and occasionally have the delusion that the govt is the only one out to get them. rather than the reality where the govt is merely one of several forces out of them
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Minarchism is the way to go.
mrttao
Well-known member
hmm
not seeing anything about protecting against megacorps
it looks like vanilla libertarian to me. the kind who are not so extreme as to advocate total stateless anarchy. but still too extreme as they want total unrestricted rich oligarchs
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Was literally what America originally was until the Civil War
mrttao
Well-known member
So what? they were not perfect before the civil war.
And made mistakes, like a lack of defenses against the rise of oligarchs / megacorps / cartels / central banking / monopolies / etc
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
No system is perfect but I rather live under a minarchy than what we currently have
mrttao
Well-known member
Sure, but you can't put the genie back into the bottle.
You cannot magically disappear firearms
You cannot magically disappear nukes
You cannot make oligarchs forget the tricks they learned on subverting democracy.
If you, today, replaced the USA govt with minarchy. We would not go back to 200 years ago. Instead we would still be totally fucked by microsoft, google, banks, etc.
That isn't to say we shouldn't drastically trim down the govt as per minarchist principals. But that it is not enough by itself.
We aren't centrists.
Libertarianism is a fundamentally radical position of complete selfownership.
The whole goal of minarchism is that it makes converting money into power hard, as there isn't much power to grasp. More, it deters those who want to grab power to make money, as it isn't usually very economical, as much less power is available. The thing libertarians tend not to understand is that there are people who want power for nonmonetary reasons. Minarchy defends against this, but not perfectly, and it will be eroded by those types of people, and so needs to be restored occasionally.
Google etc would not somehow instantly fuck us anymore thab they are already, as Google is actively using the government to fuck us. Without the government, they lose a major tool allowing fuckery.
Government simply doesn't protect from oligarchs. Because if it could, then the oligarchs buy enough of it to set it against their enemies. It's very simple: if there is power that could affect oligarchs enough to matter, then there's a market which can be used to buy that power, which will be bought by the oligarchs.
mrttao
Well-known member
And that position runs counter to both leftists and right wingers. making you a centrist by default.
You also agree with each side about a variety of points.
it really really isn't.
what they are already doing is bad enough.
and actually with less restrictions on them google could get away with doing even worse.
Govt is literally whomever has the guns right now. And they have on occasion protected from oligarchs. Anti trust laws are a thing and used to be enforced. Central banking opposition was a thing at some points in american history.
You are arguing that govt can never ever ever protect us from megacorps, that we just have to learn to live with getting raped by them. Because any attempt to do so can only backfire...
That is extremely blackpilled. and runs contrary to historical reality.
Of course there are DANGERS when doing so. You have to be extremely cautious in the implementation to ensure whatever powers is not abuse.d
But frankly that is always what you need to do with power.
A minarchist govt can easily turn into a totalitarian hellhole in a number of generations as we have seen
Ohh.
Sorry I just seem to think about the birder aspect that the right had been jumping and gnawing about fir awhile
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
I mean I want everyone to have firearms and know how to use them.
Nukes are something the state would have to ensure out continued existence against foreign powers. And oliglarchs are something that I currently don't have a good answer against other than they would have to make deals with every state in the US
Megacorps aren't restricted by government. This is your issue. Megacorps love government, because they own it and you don't. The restrictions only ever apply to their competition. Your delusion is that you think you can put the "buy the government" genie back in the bottle. You can't.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
I mean we are currently ruled by megacorps so "regulation" clearly isn't the key. The real defense against that is someone like Theodore Roosevelt and that Bullmoose is a god among men.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
You are free to bury your head in the sand if you want, but don't spread your bullshit elsewhere. I would suggest that for the start you read first what Nazis actually wrote, and then what they actually did RE:economy. In both cases, they were very definitely socialist.
No, it cannot - at least not in this context. "On Earth as it is in Heaven" is a prayer for literally God's intervention; there is no suggestion that humans themselves can create heaven on earth, without God's help.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
birder
bûr′dər
noun
- A bird watcher.
- A breeder of birds.
- A hunter of birds.
mrttao
Well-known member
Are you seriously trying to argue that anti trust laws do not exist and that never in the history of mankind has a govt actually applied them properly to break up megacorps?
History of competition law - Wikipedia
Are you trying to argue no govt ever shut down central banking?
Have you heard of president andrew jackson and the bank war?
mrttao
Well-known member
@Abhorsen your problem is that you look at a system and say
> "after 200 years, anti trust laws broke down and the govt became corrupted, bloated giant monstrosity in bed with businesses. therefore, govt cannot ever effectively apply anti trust laws"
This completely ignores the hundreds of years during which govt was effectively enforcing antitrust laws.
You even explicitly argue that a minarchist govt should field an army to protect against foreign invasion. Even though historically, eventually, after hundreds of years, that army is always turned eventually into a tool of oppression towards the citizens. But this time you accept its necessity for the hundreds of years it protected the nation from foreign invaders.
There is no such thing as an incorruptible law that stands forever.
And strong anti-trust legislation is one of the more effective ways to defang the corruptive forces that make govts go bad in the first place.
Rather than "businesses vs govt" it is just one and the same group, the oligarchs. But checking the power of the oligarchs through govt but leaving their power completely unchecked in the business sector. You allow the oligarchs to rapidly corrupt and consume your nation.
You must restrict the growth of oligarchs on both fields at once. with small govt, laws the limit the govt reach, laws that break megacorps, and a populace educated about the dangers of both and proactive in fighting against such threats in a never ending battle.
I am not arguing that anti trust laws will never ever be corrupted.
I am arguing that a minarchist+antitrust will give more years of good govt and slow down the encroachment of corruption. Before eventually the corrupt giant sprawling govt will start abusing the anti trust laws to prop up monopolies of friendly oligarchs by being used against would be competitors.
> "after 200 years, anti trust laws broke down and the govt became corrupted, bloated giant monstrosity in bed with businesses. therefore, govt cannot ever effectively apply anti trust laws"
This completely ignores the hundreds of years during which govt was effectively enforcing antitrust laws.
You even explicitly argue that a minarchist govt should field an army to protect against foreign invasion. Even though historically, eventually, after hundreds of years, that army is always turned eventually into a tool of oppression towards the citizens. But this time you accept its necessity for the hundreds of years it protected the nation from foreign invaders.
There is no such thing as an incorruptible law that stands forever.
And strong anti-trust legislation is one of the more effective ways to defang the corruptive forces that make govts go bad in the first place.
Rather than "businesses vs govt" it is just one and the same group, the oligarchs. But checking the power of the oligarchs through govt but leaving their power completely unchecked in the business sector. You allow the oligarchs to rapidly corrupt and consume your nation.
You must restrict the growth of oligarchs on both fields at once. with small govt, laws the limit the govt reach, laws that break megacorps, and a populace educated about the dangers of both and proactive in fighting against such threats in a never ending battle.
I am not arguing that anti trust laws will never ever be corrupted.
I am arguing that a minarchist+antitrust will give more years of good govt and slow down the encroachment of corruption. Before eventually the corrupt giant sprawling govt will start abusing the anti trust laws to prop up monopolies of friendly oligarchs by being used against would be competitors.